Behavioral and Cognitive-Behavioral Theories

The psychodynamic theories grew from the beliefs that

(1) personality is based on how the person develops,
(2) development stops at a certain age, and
(3) behaviors associated with development cannot be changed.
In other words, a person’s destiny is set at an early age. Finding these theories problematic, the
behavioral theorists postulated that personality consists of learned behaviors. More explicitly,
personality is synonymous with behavior, and if the behavior is changed, the personality is
changed. Initially, behavioral studies focused on human actions without much attention to the
internal thinking processes. When the complexity of behaviors could not be accounted for by
strictly behavioral explanations, a new component was added: a component of cognitions or
thought processes. The cognitive approach is an outgrowth of behavioral and psychodynamic
theories and attempts to link thought processes with behaviors.
Cognitive-behavioral theory, then, focuses on thinking and behaving rather than on feelings.
One of the best known behavioral theorists is B. F. Skinner. Additional cognitive-behavioral
theories discussed in this section are those proposed by Beck and Ellis.

Skinner: Operant Conditioning

Before jumping into a lot of terminology, it is important to understand what operant

conditioning is or attempts to do. But before we get there, let’s take a step back. So
what happens when we make a behavior? Consider this framework that will look
familiar to you:

Recognize it? Two words are different but it should remind you of Antecedent,
Behavior, and Consequence. It looks the same because it is the same. Stimulus is
another word for antecedent and is whatever comes before the behavior, usually
from the environment, but we know that the source of our behavior could be
internal too. Response is a behavior. And of course, consequence is the same word.
The definitions for these terms are the same as the ones you were given in Module 1
for the ABCs of behavior. Presenting this framework is important, because operant
conditioning as a learning model focuses on the person making some response for
which there is a consequence. As we learned from Thorndike’s work, if the
consequence is favorable or satisfying, we will be more likely to make the response
again (when the stimulus occurs). If not favorable or unsatisfying, we will be less
likely. In Section 6.7, we will talk about respondent or classical conditioning which
developed thanks to Pavlov’s efforts. This type of learning focuses on stimulus and
response.

As we have seen, the basis of operant conditioning is that you make a response for which there is a
consequence. Based on the consequence you are more or less likely to make the response again. This
section introduces the term contingency. A contingency is when one thing occurs due to another. Think
of it as an If-Then statement. If I do X, then Y will happen. For operant conditioning this means that if I
make a behavior, then a specific consequence will follow. The events (response and consequence) are
linked in time.

What form do these consequences take? There are two main ways they can present themselves.

• Reinforcement – Due to the consequences, a behavior/response is more likely to occur

in the future. It is strengthened.

• Punishment – Due to the consequence, a behavior/response is less likely to occur in the

future. It is weakened.

Let’s go through each:

 Positive Punishment (PP) – If something bad or aversive is given or

added, then the behavior is less likely to occur in the future. If you talk
back to your mother and she slaps your mouth, this is a PP. Your response
 of talking back led to the consequence of the aversive slap being delivered
or given to your face.
 Positive Reinforcement (PR) – If something good is given or added, then
the behavior is more likely to occur in the future. If you study hard and
earn, or are given, an A on your exam, you will be more likely to study
hard in the future.
 Negative Reinforcement (NR) – This is a tough one for students to
comprehend because the terms do not seem to go together and are
counterintuitive. But it is really simple, and you experience NR all the
time. This is when something bad or aversive is taken away or subtracted
due to your actions, making you more likely to make the same behavior in
the future when some stimuli presents itself. For instance, what do you do
if you have a headache? You likely answered take Tylenol. If you do this
and the headache goes away, you will take Tylenol in the future when you
have a headache. NR can either result in current escape behavior or future
avoidance behavior. Escape occurs when we are presently experiencing an
aversive event and want it to end. We make a behavior and if the aversive
event, like the headache, goes away, we will repeat the taking of Tylenol in
the future. This future action is an avoidance event. We might start to feel
a headache coming on and run to take Tylenol right away. By doing so we
have removed the possibility of the aversive event occurring and this
behavior demonstrates that learning has occurred.
 Negative Punishment (NP) – This is when something good is taken away
or subtracted making a behavior less likely in the future. If you are late to
class and your professor deducts 5 points from your final grade (the points
are something good and the loss is negative), you will hopefully be on time
in all subsequent classes.

 Schedules of Reinforcement
Skinner further described schedules of reinforcement in his operant
conditioning research. These schedules determine when specific behaviors
are reinforced (either based on the number of responses or time) and
impact how strong a learned behavior becomes.

Skinner's four schedules of reinforcement are:

1. Fixed-ratio schedules: Responses are reinforced after a specific
number of responses
2. Variable-ratio schedules: Responses are reinforced after an unspecified
or unpredictable number of responses
3. Fixed-interval schedules: Responses are reinforced after a specific
amount of time
4. Variable-interval schedules: Responses are reinforced after an
unspecified or unpredictable amount of time